Exercising my right to retract over all my contributions

[akarysbutagain]

Foreword

The French intellectual property code gives an inalienable right to authors to retract:

Nonobstant la cession de son droit d'exploitation, l'auteur, même postérieurement à la publication de son oeuvre, jouit d'un droit de repentir ou de retrait vis-à-vis du cessionnaire. Il ne peut toutefois exercer ce droit qu'à charge d'indemniser préalablement le cessionnaire du préjudice que ce repentir ou ce retrait peut lui causer. Lorsque, postérieurement à l'exercice de son droit de repentir ou de retrait, l'auteur décide de faire publier son oeuvre, il est tenu d'offrir par priorité ses droits d'exploitation au cessionnaire qu'il avait originairement choisi et aux conditions originairement déterminées.

- Article L121-4 - Code de la propriété intellectuelle

Request

I (@Akarys42 / @simpledemonn) would like to exercise my rights on all my applicable contributions, including but not limited to:

• Add security policy and GPG keys (https://github.com/QuiltMC/quiltmc.org/pull/121)
• Update nickname rules (https://github.com/QuiltMC/quiltmc.org/pull/105)
• Five installer vulnerabilities blog post (0a29c3b0f5afb85dac206baa61f1905877cb5a42)
• Cozy, metricity and modmail privacy policy (https://github.com/QuiltMC/quiltmc.org/pull/87)

Discussion

This right being inalieably granted to me, you may not oppose by any way to this request. Any previous license or agreement is null and void under the law. You do not possess any legal basis to continue using, reproducing, modifying or exploiting any of my work.

If this request is not followed, we will move for enforcement 14 days after this issue has been opened.

[gdude2002]

(This isn't legal advice, obviously.)

May as well leave a comment here too, since I left one on the other two issues:

• 121 - The keys themselves are owned by the org, but the policy is clearly yours. It should be easy enough for someone to replace if they'd like to, though.

• 105 - While a non-trivial part of this contribution was you rephrasing and clarifying what I'd already written, I think the contribution is transformative enough to be removed and rewritten under this request.

• https://github.com/QuiltMC/quiltmc.org/commit/0a29c3b0f5afb85dac206baa61f1905877cb5a42 - Yep, that's clearly yours.

• 87 - I know this to be your work as well,

Oh, and if people are wondering why it's me commenting - I was there for almost every contribution listed in these takedown issues and know how to search for context. There is no prophecy 😆

[Pyrofab]

Written works need to fulfill an originality criterion to qualify as literary work covered by French intellectual property laws. I have seen no evidence of legal mentions being classified as literary work, so the requests to delete the security policy (#121), the nickname rules (#105), and the cozy privacy policy (#87) can most likely be denied. I will note that this interpretation has been approved by a French lawyer, although one not versed in intellectual property laws.

[akarysbutagain]

Les dispositions du présent code protègent les droits des auteurs sur toutes les oeuvres de l'esprit, quels qu'en soient le genre, la forme d'expression, le mérite ou la destination.

- Article L112-1 - Code de la propriété intellectuelle

The definition of a work is very large and encompasses all sort of original content. All three of those documents have been written by hand by myself. If you believe otherwise, please bring forward any verbatim copy of those documents have existed prior to my contribution.

I have not claimed this content is literacy work. I have made the claim this content is protected work, as defined by article L112-1 of said code.

[Pyrofab]

You failed to address the originality criterion as defined by French jurisprudence. Again, I have seen no evidence that legal mentions count as "œuvres de l'esprit".

[akarysbutagain]

You have not quoted any law or case law. I have absolutely no clue what you are stating or what to answer to.

I have seen no evidence that legal mentions count as "œuvres de l'esprit".

An original work produced by a human being fits that bill, as described by the article I have previously quoted. The standard you are proposing would not make any sense, as it would mean almost no work would benefit from intellectual right protection. Can we agree all three of the works we are talking about is protected by intellectual property laws?

[Pyrofab]

I did not say that, I said that legal documents, such as contracts, are most likely not covered by intellectual property law. Are you arguing that you could suddenly prevent copies of a contract from being made because you originally wrote it ?

[akarysbutagain]

No? I am saying, for example, a contract drafted by a professional for a client (which is the origin of this privacy policy) cannot be used free of charge by a third party.

[akarysbutagain]

Sorry for the delay. The issue should be public again.

[OroArmor]

Followed in the following commits: 2781b55d5fabfc0b39d095cf9218577af60f40a9 c327749d63bcfd69ebbe13f8fa059f1f41f20782 00dd26bc1fb76926a0e4398c99765b55adf93d10